Proving the Bible

[Lemonvariable72]

And now your fucking with us.

My deepest apologies

I meant how it came to existance. He clearly didn't read the entire thread.

LOL no worries. but yes the universe can be verified to exist, that is why it more likely to be eternal then a unverfiable god.

[Tonus]

I meant how it came to existance. He clearly didn't read the entire thread.

I read the entire thread. The notion that there must have always been something seems reasonable. The notion that it was an ultra-complex, hyper-powerful and transcendentally intelligent being who decided after a (literal) eternity to start creating is simply less reasonable than the idea that perhaps the material of the universe itself has always been there, acted on by whatever natural forces may exist in those states. Maybe the universe expands and contracts on some timetable, or maybe it came into existence through a black hole in another one, part of a growing lattice of universes.

All we know is that the universe is here, and signs point to some kind of beginning, and those signs only point to god when we wedge him in there with no consideration of what that might imply. It is possible that the first act of creation was when a larval worm spun a cocoon around itself, billions of years after that first spark (accidental or otherwise) birthed the universe.

[lordofgemini]

^_^
I think this is the third time I am entering in a debate with you
Now since you said it more likely to be eternal. Think of a start. This is where our minds stop and we simply cannot comprehend.

[Tonus]

Now since you said it more likely to be eternal. Think of a start. This is where our minds stop and we simply cannot comprehend.

I agree, the concept of eternity is one that we can't grasp. The idea that something was always there and never had a beginning makes no sense to us. But we also believe that everything must come from something, and thus we can't just be comfortable with the idea that one day the universe just began. We want to know the why, the how, the where, etc.

My point is only that if we are considering the possibilities and accepting that something had to always be there, it seems more sensible to think that something relatively simple was always there, and not something unimaginably complex.

[lordofgemini]

I meant how it came to existance. He clearly didn't read the entire thread.

I read the entire thread. The notion that there must have always been something seems reasonable. The notion that it was an ultra-complex, hyper-powerful and transcendentally intelligent being who decided after a (literal) eternity to start creating is simply less reasonable than the idea that perhaps the material of the universe itself has always been there, acted on by whatever natural forces may exist in those states. Maybe the universe expands and contracts on some timetable, or maybe it came into existence through a black hole in another one, part of a growing lattice of universes.

All we know is that the universe is here, and signs point to some kind of beginning, and those signs only point to god when we wedge him in there with no consideration of what that might imply. It is possible that the first act of creation was when a larval worm spun a cocoon around itself, billions of years after that first spark (accidental or otherwise) birthed the universe.

Yep its that bit that's the most confusing. That where the notion come that is time is itself a created entity and that being is not subjected to time itself. That Being is beyond time whether past present or future. Although I don't find such an idea anywhere in my belief(except for the absolute knowledge part) but it seems plausible.

The idea larval worm is fallacious. Why did it have to be a worm. Why did it even looked like that. Why was it even matter. If its matter where did it come from. The thing we take to be eternal is unlike anything.

---

Oh and God is as simple as He can be. But our minds can not imagine it because we can only imagine what we see and relate to it. Our minds our limited. This is why Gods concept is hard to understand. Because he is not comparable to anything in anyway.

[Tonus]

The idea larval worm is fallacious. Why did it have to be a worm. Why did it even looked like that. Why was it even matter. If its matter where did it come from. The thing we take to be eternal is unlike anything.

My point about the larval worm was just to say that there may not have been a creative force directing the birth of the universe and its development into its present form. At least if we treat creation as a deliberate and purposeful act. Otherwise, gravity probably had a hand in the first creative act.

---

Oh and God is as simple as He can be.

I'm sure he is. But "simple" on his level is extraordinarily complex, if we are crediting him with creating the universe and everything in it.

[lordofgemini]

My point about the larval worm was just to say that there may not have been a creative force directing the birth of the universe and its development into its present form. At least if we treat creation as a deliberate and purposeful act. Otherwise, gravity probably had a hand in the first creative act.

I know you point is valid and acceptable. But you are still reffering to the first creative act. There is an eternity before that. All the things that lead to the first creative act cannot be ignored. And where did all those things come from. See we are inside a loop. We need something outside this loop of time and space.

I'm sure he is. But "simple" on his level is extraordinarily complex, if we are crediting him with creating the universe and everything in it.

Yes this debate comes after we accept that there is something eternal. This is an entire topic of understanding God.
Some basic ideas :
See the simplicity and complexity

---

A man came to Imam abu Ja‘far (a.s.) saying, ‘Tell me about your Lord. When did He come into existence?’" The Imam (a.s.) replied, "Woe upon you! Such question is asked only about a thing that did not exist. My Lord, all Glory belongs to Him is and will be eternally. He lives and no How question applies to Him. He did not have any coming into existence and nor there was any being for His coming into being. This does not apply to Him because He is not subject to the effects of space. He was not in any thing or on any thing nor did He invent any space for His own space. He did not become stronger after making all things nor was weak before giving being to the beings. He was not lonely before His inventing all things. He is not similar to any thing that could be called a thing. He was also not without Kingdom before the creation and nor will He be without it after all things. He lives eternally without life and the powerful king before His invention of the things and He is an all powerful king after the creation of all things. To His existence no How or Where question is applicable. There is no limit for Him nor is He definable by analogy. He does not become old due to eternal living. He doe not become alarmed because of any thing but that all things are fearful of His (disappointment). He lived without newly emerging life. He is not a describable being or that could be limit with conditions or that would have a space to depend on. He does not have a place so that He can be considered as neighboring something. He is living and one can know Him. He is the eternal King. He has the power and the kingdom. He has created all that He wanted and when He decided by His will. He can not be limited. He can not be divided or destroyed. He was before everything but no How question would apply to Him. He will be the last but no Where will apply to Him. All things will be destroyed except He. The creation belongs to Him and His is the command. He is the Holy Lord of the worlds. O inquirer, imaginations can not encompass my Lord and He does not face any confusions or bewilderment. Nothing is able to escape Him and nothing happens to Him. He can not be held responsible for anything and He does not become regretful. Neither slumber nor sleep overcomes Him. To Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth and all that is between them and under the soil.

---

[Jackalope]

Did drich and his wife get banned? Wouldn't this generally be a place he would post?

Nope, they just haven't been around much.

[Silver]

Yes this debate comes after we accept that there is something eternal. This is an entire topic of understanding God.

One should not simply accept anything without the proper evidence to support its existence. First it must be proven to exist before any real debate can begin.

[lordofgemini]

Yes this debate comes after we accept that there is something eternal. This is an entire topic of understanding God.

One should not simply accept anything without the proper evidence to support its existence. First it must be proven to exist before any real debate can begin.

Yep. And that's what I was proving...